3 ms·

A project manager is very different than a scrum master. Quoting this website https://www.coursera.org/articles/scrum-master-vs-project-manager https://www.cour

A project manager is very different than a scrum master. Quoting this website https://www.coursera.org/articles/scrum-master-vs-project-manager https://www.coursera.org/articles/scrum-master-vs-project-ma... "the Project Manager plays the leadership role by leading the planning for the execution of the project. Scrum Master plays a support role for the team members" Agile development teams should be self organizing, and so a lead that decides on things is really strange. See the 11th principle of Agile: 11. Best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams. If the team wants to appoint a tech lead, then fine. But forcing a tech lead onto an Agile team is not how it's done. I get it that "Agile" is the hype and every company claims to do "Agile". I would love the see the companies that really implement the 4 items of the manifesto and 12 Agile software development principles. I'm sure most companies are doing the reverse than what is stated there.

spamizbad 4y ago
Correct, it's not "pure" agile, because that version of agile is extremely frustrating to implement inside any organization that's not a consultancy. That shouldn't surprise you: capital "A" Agile grew out of consultancies. It's not a good fit for product-driven technology firms, but product-driven firms try to adopt small "a" agile principles. The temptation to say "If you're not enjoying yourself you're doing it wrong" doesn't really work here. Agile was not shaped by technology firms or a product culture. Its roots are in a contract job to rewrite a payroll system at a Fortune 500 company and if that's your line of work then you can hew closer to “pure” agile. The rest of us are handed a process we have to make work inside an existing org.
- koonsolo 4y ago
  I haven't worked in any 100% pure agile team either. But the main point I was trying to get across is that the parts that work against proper development is not where you follow the agile part, it's where the agile part isn't followed.

spamizbad 4y ago

Correct, it's not "pure" agile, because that version of agile is extremely frustrating to implement inside any organization that's not a consultancy. That shouldn't surprise you: capital "A" Agile grew out of consultancies. It's not a good fit for product-driven technology firms, but product-driven firms try to adopt small "a" agile principles. The temptation to say "If you're not enjoying yourself you're doing it wrong" doesn't really work here. Agile was not shaped by technology firms or a product culture. Its roots are in a contract job to rewrite a payroll system at a Fortune 500 company and if that's your line of work then you can hew closer to “pure” agile. The rest of us are handed a process we have to make work inside an existing org.

koonsolo 4y ago
I haven't worked in any 100% pure agile team either. But the main point I was trying to get across is that the parts that work against proper development is not where you follow the agile part, it's where the agile part isn't followed.